Is Ahmednasir a device of great ingenuity?

From: Judy Miriga

Ma good people,

The Former IEBC critic Ahmednasir Evidence in Court is camauflague prejudicial…….This approach is dazzling after criticizing IEBC transparency and failed legitimacy of political independence and integrity. This is definately confuses observers when he now becomes IEBC its sole advocate in the Supreme Court with a conspicuous combination of materials pattern which many observers view and consider it as questionable with high contrast coloration that could be logically disruptive with an aim to eliminate or confuse focus in the shadow of truth; a pattern expected to provide counter-shading glasses that confuses but causes blurry vision making the object visible but momentarily harder to locate its critics on matters of credibility.

Is Ahmednasir a device of great ingenuity? Is conflict of interest acceptable???

How the Supreme Court will view and handle this scenario is for us to keenly watch……….

It is because, Kenya is not a personal property nor does it belong to some special interest community……..Let them do their colaborative dwanya spin, the world is watching and we aint going anywhere any time soon, we are here to see the end of it all ……..!!!

Aint we feeding on Juicy stuff ma people……???

Love you all good people, let us all continue to exercise the maturity of excellence and we wont go wrong !!!!

Cheers !!!

Judy Miriga
Diaspora Spokesperson
Executive Director
Confederation Council Foundation for Africa Inc.,
USA
http://socioeconomicforum50.blogspot.com
and Special Coordinator Representative for Pan Africa
World African Diaspora Union (WADU)
in Maryland, Virginia and DC

– – – – – – – – – – –

NTV Kenya Livestream


Streamed live on Feb 8, 2013
http://www.ntv.co.ke/live
This is a live NTV feed straight from our studios at Nation Centre, Nairobi.
*This stream is not available at all times due to restrictions on some of our programming content.Please bear with us.

Live Feed: Supreme Court holds presidential petition pre-trial hearing

Posted by admin on Monday, March 25, 2013 · Leave a Comment
Presidential Election Petition pre-trial conference currently underway at the Supreme Court. It is holding the pre-trial hearing of the three petitions challenging the validity of the presidential results and is expected to zero down on the main issues raised by the litigants.

Critic to defender: Former IEBC critic Ahmednasir changes tune

Published on Mar 24, 2013
http://www.ntv.co.ke
Did the IEBC pass the integrity test? That is the question that many perhaps are asking, now that the critic is in their defense team. Ahmednasir Abdullahi a prominent lawyer raised several pertinent questions concerning the integrity of the Commission and its commissioners more than a month before the March 4th election. In an opinion piece published by The Daily Nation on 3rd February 2013, Abdullahi is however representing the IEBC in the CORD petition that seeks to nullify the declaration of Uhuru Kenyatta as president elect. So what changed in two months? NTV’s Ken Mijungu takes a look at Abdullahi then and now.

Supreme Court Set For Epic Legal Showdown

Published on Mar 24, 2013
The stage is set for the epic legal showdown at the Supreme Court, as the highest court in the land begins to hear and determine three presidential election petitions starting Monday. The 6-Judge bench and the defence teams will on Monday meet for a pre-trial conference which is expected to, among other things, isolate the key issues in the petitions and set the ground rules during the hearings to ensure expeditious conclusion of the cases within the remaining 6 days as provided for in the constitution. And as Francis Gachuri reports, the verdict of the Judges, expected to be delivered later in the week will be final.

Supreme Court holds presidential petition pre-trial hearing
By EMMANURL TOILI etoili@ke.nationmedia.com
Posted Monday, March 25 2013 at 15:00

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered re-tallying of the presidential results in 22 polling stations using Forms 34 and 36 so as to determine the numbers of votes cast over number of registered voters.

The exercise will commence on Tuesday from 8am.

The court also approved the application by the Attorney General to act as ‘a friend of the court’ in presidential petitions but dropped the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) application.

In his opening remarks, Chief Justice Willy Mutunga said the judges will be objective in its ruling on the petition.

“We as judges are servants of the law. We shall be objective,” he said.

“Supreme court to remain objective. Public should trust us to do our job. Justice should manifest to be done,” he added.

Dr Mutunga also urged Kenyans to accept the final decision that will be arrived at by the Supreme Court and move on.

“Whatever decision emerges from this petition, we must march forward,” he said.

While addressing the court, Attorney General Githu Muigai sought to be enjoined in the petition as amicus curiae or a friend of the court.

“We can only be enjoined in the case on the discretion of the Court,” said AG Muigai.

However, Mr Odinga has filed an objection to the Attorney General joining the presidential petition.

AG Muigai also argues that his appearance in petition is not to support any party but to lay down law as it is with authorities from across the globe.

“The AG’s role is to elucidate on legal issues, not to support any side,” he said.

Supreme Court orders retallying of presidential poll results in 22 polling stations

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered re-tallying of the presidential results in 22 polling stations using Forms 34 and 36 so as to determine the numbers of votes cast over number of registered voters.

The exercise will commence on Tuesday from 8am.

In the ruling, Justice Smokin Wanjala said the retallying would aim to show if the number over votes cast exceeds the number of registered voters.

Justice Wanjala also ordered that the results from the 22 polling stations be filed at the Supreme Court registry by Wednesday 4pm after re-tallying.

The court also ordered that all the representatives and agents from the petitioners and respondents in the recount process to take an oath.

The court also approved the application by the Attorney General to act as ‘a friend of the court’ in presidential petitions but dropped the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) application.

The judges also consolidated three petitions and allowed the Cord petition to take lead.

Early in the day in his opening remarks, Chief Justice Willy Mutunga said the judges will be objective in its ruling on the petition.

“We as judges are servants of the law. We shall be objective,” he said.

“Supreme court to remain objective. Public should trust us to do our job. Justice should manifest to be done,” he added.

Dr Mutunga also urged Kenyans to accept the final decision that will be arrived at by the Supreme Court and move on.

“Whatever decision emerges from this petition, we must march forward,” he said.

While addressing the court, Attorney General Githu Muigai sought to be enjoined in the petition as amicus curiae or a friend of the court.

“We can only be enjoined in the case on the discretion of the Court,” said AG Muigai.

However, Mr Odinga has filed an objection to the Attorney General joining the presidential petition.

AG Muigai also argues that his appearance in petition is not to support any party but to lay down law as it is with authorities from across the globe.

“The AG’s role is to elucidate on legal issues, not to support any side,” he said.

However, IEBC boss Issack Hassan’s lawyer Ahmednassir Abdullahi said his client had no objection with the appearance of AG in the petition.

However, IEBC boss Issack Hassan’s lawyer Ahmednassir Abdullahi said his client had no objection with the appearance of AG in the petition.

Lawyers Katwa Kigen and Fred Ngatia also have no objection to AG being enjoined in the petition.

Notably, lawyer Kethi Kilonzo for Africog argued that issues before court do not require an interpretation of the law to warrant inclusion of the AG.

However, Cord’s lawyer George Oraro argued that the AG has applied to be enjoined without request from the court or any party.

“The AG has misinterpreted circumstances under which he can apply to be enjoined in cases before court,” he said.

“An election petition is not a civil proceeding. The government is not defined in the Constitution but state is defined,” he added.

Mr Oraro argued that in relation to this petition the AG can be enjoined by the Constitution to to assist the IEBC.

However, AG Muigai disagreed with Mr Oraro and argued that the petition was a civil matter.

AG Muigai argued that as amicus curiae, his office will not impose views on the court hearing Cord’s petition against President-elect Uhuru Kenyatta.

“I have not advised the president-elect, contrary to claims by lawyer George Oraro,” he said.

Lawyer A.B Shah also lodged an application for the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) to be enjoined in the petitions before the Supreme Court as amicus curiae.

However, LSK faced opposition on its application to be enjoined as amicus curiae in presidential petitions by parties before Supreme Court.

Mr Oraro opposed the inclusion of the LSK in petition arguing that the society is partisan.

Lawyer Fred Ngatia representing Jubilee Coalition also opposed inclusion of LSK as amicus curiae the society was an observer in the General Election.

Mr Ngatia also argued that LSK is on record ‘supporting a petitioner.’

During the submission, political activist Nazlin Umar disrupted court proceedings for several minutes at the Supreme Court as she attempted to address judges over an application she had filed.

Ms Umar said as the “Wanjiku’s” lawyer, she was disappointed that her application has been ignored.

However, Dr Mutunga said that the Supreme Court will not hear or deal with any petitions, requests or submissions that were done past the allowed time.

Petition consolidation

During the submissions, Jubilee’s lawyer Mr Ngatia argued that a couple of preliminary issues had to be addressed before the hearing of the petition.

Also, AG Muigai advised the court to give the parties involved time to come up with a conclusive mechanism of what may be required for progress.

Mr Ngatia argued that the petition by Cord only raised one issue.

“The court should consolidate all the petitions and marry all the related issues raised by petitioners and respondents,” he said.

Lawyer Njoroge Regeru argued that the petitions consolidation were sensible and will lead to arguable case and speedy resolution.

Africog’s Counsel Keth Kilonzo also argued that matters of fact and matters of law should be consolidated to allow a reasonable suit.

However, Mr Oraro said the consolidation of the cases including respondent number three may not hold.

Mr Ngatia noted that petitions 4 and 5 had similar issues, contest and engagement and thus could be consolidated.

Lawyer Ahmednassir Abdullahi also argued that petition number 5 bore more weight than 3 and 4 and should be given preference.

Petition mutations

Mr Ahmednasir also asked the court to give directions on the type of petitions to be followed.

Mr Ahmednasir argued that his client, Mr Issack Hassan was concerned with continued mutation of the presidential petitions, hence, affecting its expediency.

Mr Ngatia also requested the court to give guidance on the petitions to avoid the mutations.

“There’s new evidence being introduced and this means the defence teams must be given time to respondents to all affidavits,” he said.

“There are 122 new electoral areas that are being introduced by the petitioner which bears grave consequences on time,” he added.

However, Mr Oraro argued that it is within the provisions of law to file new evidence as the hearing continues.

On his side, lawyer Harun Ndubi argued that the introduction of affidavits is important at any point.

The judges, led by Dr Mutunga, could either dismiss the petition, order a re-count of the presidential votes, settle on a re-run, or rule that the whole process begins afresh with the registration of voters.

The actual hearings of the petition are expected to start on Thursday and could continue un-interrupted until concluded.

Apart from the petition filed by Cord’s presidential candidate Mr Raila Odinga challenging the declaration of Jubilee’s candidate Mr Uhuru Kenyatta as winner of the presidential election, there is another filed by a civil society group, the African Centre for Open Governance (Africog).

Also before the court is a petition filed by some members of Mr Kenyatta’s campaign team, social media activists Dennis Itumbi and Moses Kuria and a third person, challenging the inclusion of spoilt ballots in the calculation of votes attained by each candidate.

The objections raised by Mr Kenyatta and Deputy President-elect Mr William Ruto, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) and its chairman Issack Hassan, will also be narrowed down to what will be argued verbally in court.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *